Supreme Court rules against Betcha.com

Internet Community & Entertainment Corp., d/b/a Betcha.com v. State, No. 82845-8. Internet Community & Entertainment Corporation launched a website called Betcha.com -- a person-to-person betting site that allowed users to post wagers on the outcomes of a wide variety of events. Betcha.com charged its customers a fee for user transactions. Losing bettors had up to 72 hours after a winning claim was made to choose not to pay the loss.

In 2007, the Washington State Gambling Commission informed the company that Betcha.com was engaged in illegal gambling. The company sued the state seeking a declaratory judgment that its social wagering site does not violate state law. Betcha.com lost at superior court. On appeal, the Court of Appeals held that because Betcha.com had not “gambled” because bettors understood that the losing bettor might not honor the debt.

The Supreme Court, with Justice Tom Sanders writing the unanimous opinion, reversed the Court of Appeals. The state Gambling Act prohibits bookmaking, which is defined as “accepting bets, upon the outcome of future contingent events, as a business or in which the bettor is charged a fee or ‘vigorish’ for the opportunity to place a bet.” RCW 9.46.0213. The court concluded that Betcha.com’s entire business model was based on charging fees from users for the opportunity to place a bet. Based on the conclusion that Betcha.com was engaged in prohibited bookmaking, the court declined to address whether the site’s users are actually engaged in gambling.

Supreme Court agrees to hear Internet gambling case

The Washington Supreme Court has agreed to review a Court of Appeals ruling in a case that tests whether the Washington State Gambling Act (chapter 9.46 RCW) applies to an Internet gambling site. The case is Internet Community & Entertainment Corp., d/b/a Betcha.com v. State.

In 2007, the company was informed by agents of the Washington State Gambling Commission that Betcha.com was engaged in illegal professional gambling. The company sued the state seeking a  declaratory judgment that its social wagering site does not violate state law. Betcha.com lost at the trial level. On appeal, the Court of Appeals held that because Betcha.com customers agreed in advance that participants were not required to pay their losses, Betcha.com was not engaged in "gambling" as defined in the Gambling Act. The state appealed, and the case now goes to the Supreme Court.

The court agreed to hear several other cases which we'll post shortly.